Future of Sound

Nobody has time to listen to music anymore - they're too busy posting about it on social media!
But I will make a bold prediction that Dolby Atmos will change classical recordings forever...instead of just giving you the back echoes of a concert hall with their 5.1 releases...now they'll be able to give us ambience overhead as well (now if they could only make my tie feel too tight...and regret how much I overpaid for these seats...)

 

Considering the fact you can achieve amazing sound in 2017 by using proper decades old equipment like turntables and tube electronics, the reality is there hasn't really been anything new under the sun for audio reproduction that really, honestly, has truly advanced audio....meaning improved the sound, from a listener's perspective, that has not happened in many decades.

Digital sure has not. I'ts added convenience and ease of use, but advanced the sound quality? Nope, it has not.

Solid state has it's place but frankly we would be fine without it with properly designed tube electronics. Speakers have no true modern advancements either, yeah some fancy cone materials, but again there's plenty of decades old speakers when in proper working order deliver amazing sound.

Stereo, not really an advancement, it just offers a different way to hear music.

The "audio emperor" needs to see that he still has his same old clothes from about 50 years ago give or take.

 

Nothing too big will happen in the future. 16-bit/44.1k will still be king in the digital world. SACDs will still be aimed for those who have money to throw at it. More people are going to Stream Hi-Rez and buy more Hi-Rez online.

In matter of fact, nothing too much will change.

 

Wise guy.

 

Just stumbled upon this thread, I think we've hit the limit with recording and source technology. But I do believe we can make amplifiers and headphones, turntables etc. That will sound better and more pleasing to our ears. I think it's a lot like TV screens, which is something I don't know a lot about, but those images on the fancy displays in electronics stores do our eyes really appreciate those? It's kinda like headphones that reproduce frequencies our ears can't hear, the technology has surpassed what we, as humans be comprehend, and process. Those TV screens, we couldn't go that location or landscape and see that the same way we do on those TVs, it's all enhanced. In terms of audio, that's not necessarily a bad thing, if we enjoy the sound more, then it's an improvement. That's my opinion anyway, interesting topic...

 

There have been improvements in sound reproduction, especially in headphone systems and in ear listening (who used in ear devices years ago?). Playback systems, including DACs and speakers, have also improved. There is also greater awareness (because of forums like this) of solutions to other problems of listening, such as to room acoustics (both in physical items like bass traps, and software such as Dirac). Of course this has been accompanied by those who have identified issues we didn't know existed and helpfully provided solutions. Some of these may not be issues at all it's surprising to hear!

I expect more of the same, especially in the area of software.

As I'm an old fart I'm a bit weary of the next best thing - Pono, MQA .... I'm impressed with what I hear from Red Book CDs and am quite happy with that.

 

Oh I agree, there have been improvements, I'm just not sure we can expect to see many more significant ones, especially when most people who are interested, have heard top of the line in hi-fi, that is home and studio audio, versus portable and carry on music formats, like iPods, and Pono etc.

 

Question regarding the improvements of high resolution digital audio over redbook: I understand that increased bit depth gives you more dynamic range and increased sampling rate provides greater frequency response. Is this correct? Are the benefits more complicated than this? Please help me understand.

 

That's my understanding too, but the comment is often that the Red Book CD specs allow up to 22.5kHz and a dynamic range of 96dB and that these are supposed to be more then adequate to reproduce music.

There are some threads on here and elsewhere comparing Red Book CD and higher resolutions with all sorts of reasoning why either CD is more then adequate, or that hi-res is better because.... They make interesting reading when personal prejudice doesn't get too involved.

 

Regarding live music/actual instruments: To produce something fundamentally different would require either a different recording process or AI to reconstruct a live performance from a recording and metadata.

If we are talking about electronica / computer music then the recording is the reality. Nothing more needed.

 

Are SACD's gushing forth? I thought that was a niche market. Perhaps someone has the numbers or market share. Streaming now accounts for over 50% of music revenues. For purchasing media, LP's are the hot item these days. As one said above, if the music isn't good, it doesn't make any difference what you play it back on.

The ease with which indie musicians can get their music to market today is a real blessing. There is tremendous variety and creativity so we are not stuck with the mega acts who sign with the majors.

 

I recommend the "3D" (binaural, really) article from page 1. It took a while before I stopped asking myself why 5.1/surround playback wouldn't produce the results the author gushed about in his opening story.

But by the end, you realize it's about the recording/acquisition process, not the reproduction process. You also realize (or at least I thought so) that there's a certain "gimmickyness" to it (as there is, to an extent, to a lot of visual 3D content) that people find they can live without. But it was my impression that both binaural and Quadrophonic failed in the marketplace, probably for very different reasons, but maybe some of the same reasons (as in, content being predominantly distributed on 2-channel media - i.e., LP records. But I'll have to re-read up on how they actually manufactured and played back Quadrophonic LPs. It's been a while.).

Multi-channel and digital playback systems mean that time (and space?) can be audibly skewed, and perhaps that is necessary to get to feeling like something is "live" (as in, standing next to Thom Yorke as he plays the piano.) Perhaps M/CH and digital mean that binaural and Quad can really happen the way they were intended; or even something new and previously unheard of can come along that isn't tiring or trickery.

 

I admit not having read all the thread. anyway, in my opinion:

today's digital technology would allow for an incredibly faithful reproduction of any music signal

BUT

this overwhelming computing power is currently used to obtain the same sound we boys in the 70s got when recording cassettes with the needles going deep in the red.

 

Must be that darn compression....

 

Y ou either have to realistically reproduce the recording ambiance in the playback room or you have to translate / scale the music so it sounds undistorted by the room. This is not simply digital signal prcessing as we know it. If the music is being recorded in a 30 x 45 x 15 foot room then playback in a 15 x 23 x 10 foot room is not going to do the same thing to the sound waves. For one thing deep bass notes that play undistorted in the recording room will be truncated in the playback room. Also the reflection patterns of the recording and playback room won't be the same.

 

IIRC, the printed instructions on Hi-Bias/Metal cassettes SAID to let things go a little in the red....

 

Do you mean "recording the room" as they do for films?

AFAIK it's standard procedure in film. I confess to NOT knowing if they do this for music recordings.

The "secret sauce" in binaural has always seemed to be putting mics where ears lie. Are they counting on our thick skulls being just part of the room furniture which distorts things in one ear vs. the other? Or, as close as they are, does the music in fact reach one ear/mic earlier in time? I was thinking more of the capability of digital tech to simulate that time delay rather than digital shaping to "Concert Hall", "Jazz Club", etc.

 

Binaural is basically for headphone listening. Dont confuse the "ORTF" microphone spacing of microphones 7" apart with binaural recording

There is no consistency in the way recordings are made whether soundtracks, pop music or classical music. But an accurate playback system would just reproduce whatever environment the sounds were recorded in. Of course in practice that means a playback system has to reproduce a nearly unlimited set of recording spaces or DI to consoles in a nearly unlimited set of playback spaces.

 

Yeah, I think I'm going back to my small stash of 60's 45s which I got my hands on when then were new.

 

Yeah I love my 45s too. My own advice is try nearfield listening. It mostly takes the room out of the equation without a lot of effort. The only speakers that can't do this are highly complex multidriver speakers that don't cohere in the nearfield. True advances in recording and playback will require gobs of AI to accomplish.

 

My "home office" is basically a small closet outfitted with work clothes, my desk, my 4 computers, an M-Audio AP 192, a pair of M-Audio M40s, and a Fiio for DSD. My Audioengine HD6's are "out" in the bedroom.

Audiophile heaven? Of course not. But I also know that my remaining time on Earth will exhaust before I listen to everything I've amassed in my life once, let alone A/Bing every last friggin' variation on the same old same old for some incremental advantage.

(Rosebud. Rosebud.)

Still, who WOULDN'T want to add a subwoofer to that....?

 

Smell-i-sound !!!

 

There won't be a true breakthrough in sound reproduction until auditory brain implants are perfected. Once we can bypass the human ear and cochlear nerve entirely and deliver hi-fidelity sound directly to the brainstem it will eliminate a lot of middlemen. It might happen sooner than we think. Then we can all argue about which implant models are true audiophile quality and which are mere mid-fi.

 

I'm mostly looking forward to better technology for vinyl...

 

Legalized pot. This forum will be full of threads with titles like "Which is the best pot for Classical music?'